The Korean Peninsula lies at the heart of the most dynamic region in the world. About one third of global trade and one half of the world’s energy shipments originate or terminate in Northeast Asia. At the same time, the Korean Peninsula is highly vulnerable. North Korean nuclear-weapon tests and missile-test launches, as well as the opaqueness of the regime and its motivations, underline the risks posed to stability on the Peninsula. A major military confrontation would not only create human suffering on a massive scale but also chaos in global markets and logistics. Northeast Asia still does not have a proper mechanism to address regional security challenges, and the region’s security architecture continues to rest mainly upon bilateral relations between regional actors.

The seminar will explore the challenges to East Asian security, with a particular focus on North Korea. It will furthermore assess the importance of confidence-building measures and non-traditional security cooperation, such as the Northeast Asia Peace and Cooperation Initiative (NAPCI), launched by South Korea.

The seminar will also serve as a launch event for a FIIA Briefing Paper discussing related themes.

Jyrki KALLIO, Senior Research Fellow, the Finnish Institute of
International Affairs

Chair:Bart GAENS, Senior Research Fellow, the Finnish Institute
of International Affairs

Summary of the seminar

Programme
Director Arkady Moshes opened the
seminar, pointing out that FIIA closely follows East Asian affairs e.g. by
organising seminars. We all know the importance of the region for global trade,
even in Finland, he said. The region is also displaying some worrying
characteristics, like the unpredictable and non-transparent regime in North
Korea, coupled with a lack of conflict prevention mechanisms in the region.

Senior
Research Fellow Bart Gaens referred
to the Asian Paradox: on one hand, there are vibrant economies, integration,
trade and investment, but on the other hand nationalism, rivalry, territorial
disputes, and arms race. In order to stop this cycle, a regional approach to
promote trust, dialogue and cooperation is needed. The seminar was to address
three issues in this regard. First of all, a multilateral approach in view of
the failure of the six-party talks, including the role of the Northeast Asia
Peace and Cooperation Initiative (NAPCI). Secondly, potential lessons drawn
from the European post-war experience, despite differences such as a lack of
reconciliation processes in East Asia. And thirdly, the stance of the
international community regarding North Korea’s nuclear weapons. Should
denuclearisation and other objectives be linked or separate?

Kim Choon-goo began his presentation with a brief coverage of the current situation on the Peninsula. Recent events such as the cross-border shellings are
in South Korea’s view carefully planned provocations by the DPRK. The North seemingly
wants to escalate tensions and it has adopted a hawkish attitude to its
southern neighbour. Despite attempts by South Korea to reconcile the situation,
North Korea is planning strategic provocations such as the satellite launch due
in October. It has taken advantage of the situation in the ROK, because in the
long run, lingering tensions will instill doubts about the sustainability of
the South’s policy.

Mr Kim went
on to describe the NAPCI initiative that the ROK government has been promoting
since President Park took office 2.5 years ago. It is not an organisation, but
rather a process for building norms of multilateral cooperation, mutual benefit
and trust. Through habits of cooperation, positive change can come about and
resolve the paradox where interdependence meets lack of cooperation. This is
part of President Park’s diplomatic strategy, the so-called "Trustpolitik”. The
ROK is learning from the history of German unification, and the way the OSCE
helped relieve tension. The country is laying the foundation for the peaceful
reunification of the peninsula. To this end, the government is trying to
facilitate cooperation in soft security issues where all parties can join in.
These include nuclear safety, energy security, climate change, cyberspace
issues, public health, and disaster management. The first intergovernmental
high-level meeting on NAPCI was held last year. The
US, China, Japan, Russia and Mongolia were represented, as were the EU and
NATO. Another of these meetings is due in October this year.

Choi Kang first discussed North Korea.
People in Pyongyang are better off than before, they know where to buy what
they want. Whether the economic situation is sustainable is questionable. The
semi-capitalist system leads to corruption. Although people are well-educated
and hard-working, even Chinese companies are reluctant to invest in North
Korea. The ROK hopes that the Kaesong Industrial Complex could be expanded, but
on the condition that the North gives up nuclear weapons.

Politically,
the DPRK is quite stable, but in the past couple of years, the promotion and
demotion of party officials and the executions of military leadership has
spread fear among the elite. The stability will be challenged by the loyalty of
generals. The change of the power structure between the party and the military
in the future will have great significance.

The most
critical issue are WMDs. North Korea is planning to launch a satellite and has alluded
to nuclear test plans. Despite offers by South Korea and the United States to
guarantee regime security, Kim Jong-un cannot change his policy line and North
Korea remains a de facto nuclear power. Denuclearisation must be sought
together by the five parties and the international community, but to date all
efforts to engage North Korea have failed. The country’s conventional capabilities
are also underestimated. Seoul is at a distance of only 40 km of the
Demilitarized Zone. North Korea has added troops in the coastal area,
increasing the ability to attack islands, and is diversifying its military
capabilities.

Dr Choi then
addressed multilateral cooperation and NAPCI, which the current ROK
administration has been consistent in trying to achieve. Even the United States
is becoming more supportive of the initiative, and Japan has found the utility
of multilateral dialogue despite the difficulties with South Korea.

According
to Professor Pekka Korhonen, while
the EU’s economy worsens, the East Asian states have raised their status. But
the momentum for political cooperation, he argued, was perhaps 15-20 years ago.
He did not expect quick results from NAPCI. There has been a long string of
South Korean initiatives. No strong, open agreements in East Asia seems to
succeed, whether between China and Japan
or between Japan and South Korea. Pride and maintenance of honour are important
in these cultures, which hinders cooperation. The conflict is useful in the
domestic policy of the region’s countries. From the point of view of the US and
Europe, Japan is gliding towards the position of a pariah state, Professor
Korhonen asserted. The Chinese and Korean argumentation about war issues has
begun to tarnish Japan’s reputation.

Everyone actually
benefits from North Korea’s pariah role and this maintains the status quo.
Japan can adopt the role of a victim, where before they were seen as the
perpetrators of war crimes. South Korea is able to depict itself as democratic
and civilised. Japan is placed in a smaller and smaller role by China, but
South Korea has good relations with both China and the US.

NAPCI looks
good as a construct, but non-traditional soft security issues are not the best
place to start, Professor Korhonen said. Ending the annual war games would be a
step towards Trustpolitik. A bilateral, secret dialogue is the way to go, not
an international public one. Professor Korhonen does not believe in an imminent
collapse, since North Korea is a "functioning society”. The DPRK has no reason
to give up nuclear weapons.

Senior
Research Fellow Jyrki Kallio gave
comments based on the recently published FIIA Briefing Paper. He agreed with Professor Korhonen
that demonising North Korea and predicting an imminent collapse is
unconstructive. It would be conceited to think of North Korea as irrational or
crazy. It is important to understand the discrepancy between what is best for
the country and what is best for the leadership. Kim Jong-un has cemented the
status of the nuclear weapons programme as part of his policy because it is his
only trump card. Slamming the door on the rapprochement efforts of South Korea
is irrational, yet rational from the point of view of the leadership. The DPRK
hopes to have bilateral talks with the US and believes the nuclear weapons can
help with this goal.

According
to Mr Kallio, few experts believe in an imminent collapse, but since the 1990s,
the fundamental problem remains the lack of food and fuel. The future of the
country is not sustainable. For now, the elite in Pyongyang is satisfied, the
military is in Kim’s command, and the population is keeping the façade of
belief in the propaganda and maintaining unity. However, it will be difficult
to build up the next generation of top leaders. Younger members of the elite
are more interested in seeking their own enrichment, but less patriotic and
less religiously inclined to support the dynasty. The transition could be
abrupt and lead to an erosion of the party from within. Uprisings by ordinary
people and civil war are also possible. Or, if Kim Jong-un died without an
heir, a power struggle in the party would follow. It is hard to believe
everything would continue as before in the long term. Should the country
collapse, other parties have no mechanism for dealing with it. They can only
develop damage control mechanisms, Mr Kallio concluded.

After the
presentations and comments, the discussion continued. Mr Kim pointed out the
lack of certainty about what is going on and whether Kim Jong-un has the real power.
There is pressure from everywhere on the DPRK and China has warned the North
not to launch the satellite. If they do, there will be more sanctions.

Dr Choi
agreed that in the short term, the situation will remain stable. However, the
loyalty of the people or the power structure between the party and the military
raise questions. A popular uprising is difficult because people are closely
monitored. The South does not mean to demonise the North, but there is a lack
of trust because of its provocations. North Korea takes advantage of the
concern of others over the possibility of collapse: China is still pumping
resources and engages in barter trade with the DPRK. Human rights issues should
be raised more, Dr Choi said.

The floor was opened for audience comments. It
was noted that citing facts is not "demonisation”, and the use of the word
"pariah” in connection with Japan was criticised. Other topics of discussion
included the differences in the situation of the Peninsula compared to Germany,
China’s stance on reunification and the US as an ally of the ROK, and the
lifting of sanctions which was not seen as an option by the panelists.